Hello, South Bay! Welcome to Wikipedia! Thank you for your contributions to this free encyclopedia. If you decide that you need help, check out Getting Help below or place {{helpme}} on your talk page and ask your question there. Please remember to sign your name on talk pages by clicking or using four tildes (~~~~); this will automatically produce your username and the date. Finally, please do your best to always fill in the edit summary field. Below are some useful links to facilitate your involvement. Happy editing! — Mikhailov Kusserow (talk) 05:37, 28 July 2008 (UTC)[reply] Getting started A tutorial • Our five pillars • Getting mentored How to: edit a page • upload and use images Getting help Frequently asked questions • Tips Where to ask questions or make comments Request administrator attention Policies and guidelines Neutral point of view • No original research Verifiability • Reliable sources • Citing sources What Wikipedia is not • Biographies of living persons Manual of Style • Three-revert rule • Sock puppetry Copyrights • Policy for non-free content • Image use policy External links • Spam • Vandalism Deletion policy • Conflict of interest • Notability The community Build consensus • Resolve disputes Assume good faith • Civility • Etiquette No personal attacks • No legal threats Community Portal • Village pump Signpost • IRC channels • Mailing lists Writing articles Be bold in editing • Develop an article The perfect article • Manual of style Stubs • Categories • Disambiguation Pages needing attention • Peer review Miscellaneous User name • User pages • Talk pages Clean up: General - Spam - Vandalism Join a WikiProject • Translation Useful templates • Tools • User scripts

Welcome to Wikipedia. Although everyone is welcome to make constructive contributions to Wikipedia, at least one of your recent edits did not appear to be constructive and has been removed. Please use the sandbox for any test edits you would like to make, and read the welcome page to learn more about contributing constructively to this encyclopedia. Thank you.

If you reference accurate articles and review former discussions, you will find that General Motors is the world's largest automaker by annual sales as of 2007. If you would like to add that Toyota Motor has surpassed them in the first three quarters of 2008, you may do this as this is true. This is not a "controversial subject". I only ask that when you make edits, be sure they are indeed correct. Thank You.

Did you know that you can sign your comments to Talk pages by clicking the signature button () or by typing four tildes, like so: ~~~~? That way we know who made comments on the Talk page, and when. Thanks! Also see WP:SIG for more information.

I'm not sure why you tagged my edits to this article as vandalism--I've put them back in along with a note on the talk page explaining my rationale. Best wishes, 66.208.17.254 (talk) 18:44, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! I ask to you please forgive me, honest mistake. South Bay (talk) 23:31, 4 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in my RfA, which succeeded with 56 in support, 12 in opposition and 3 neutral votes. I am truly honored by the trust that the community has placed in me. Whether you supported me, opposed me, or if you only posted questions or commented om my RfA, I thank you for your input and I will be looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas :). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). All the Best, Mifter (talk)

Mifter (talk) 23:55, 6 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nicely done! This is an excellent idea and works really well. Thanks for making that edit--Cailil ^talk 02:58, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, South Bay. You have new messages at McDoobAU93's talk page.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.

I really like the infobox you came up with. Since you know more about infobox design than I do, may I offer the following suggestions. In my opinion, the links should be ordered (and named) like this:

Theme parks

• Universal Studios Florida
• Islands of Adventure

Other attractions

• CityWalk Orlando (wikilink should direct to "Universal CityWalk#Universal CityWalk Orlando")
• Wet 'n Wild Orlando

Resort hotels

• Hard Rock Hotel (wikilink to "Hard Rock Cafe", as HRC operates this hotel, not Loews)
• Loews Portofino Bay Hotel (wikilink to Loews Hotels, as you have it now)
• Loews Royal Pacific Resort (same as above)

In my opinion, there shouldn't be a link to Halloween Horror Nights; it should be listed in the article, as it is, but I wouldn't be concerned about having it in this infobox. Maybe you should start a topic on the resort's talk page to discuss possible other additions/changes.

A great job ... thanks for your hard work!

McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:07, 10 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hey again. I got a look at the new template you revised, and while I did go in and make some of the minor changes (just to the name of the links), I wasn't about to change the overall look. It looks just fine, and I'm going to add it to the related Universal Orlando Resort sub-articles. --McDoobAU93 (talk) 19:29, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I'm curious about the edits you made back in 29 May to the Orlando, Florida article, http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Orlando,_Florida&diff=next&oldid=292845285 . Most of the edit looks fine, good work infact, but the information about the nickname and the "Eastern dividing mark" is a little unclear. Can you clarify what this is supposed to mean, or at least find a reference for it? thanks riffic (talk) 23:55, 11 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Ok! I have provided a reference for you! Cheers South Bay (talk) 20:15, 12 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

What are you doing to Sacramento, California? DoElado County? Who then was a gentleman? (talk) 01:28, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Aww, thanks! –Juliancolton | ^Talk 03:29, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You recently did a cleanup edit to this page, which introduced extra horizontal lines outside of the box. I couldn't fix it so I reverted your edit. Could you look at it again? Thank you, Kusma (talk) 11:35, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Is John Logie Baird. If you could change the incorrect information you added on the television article, it would be most appreciated. 91.85.191.206 (talk) 19:13, 29 June 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello South Bay, nice to meet you and thanks so much for the barnstar. I hope you didn't mind that revert. It was great of you to add a source, because the claim was a good addition to the article. Welcome and hope to see more of your work. Best wishes. -SusanLesch (talk) 04:55, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, South Bay. User Japandamonium here. Would you mind doing both the public and myself the favor of getting off of all of the car-related pages. It has become obviously clear that you know zero about cars, but you would rather undo what others have contributed with factual content to improve and enhance the article, don't you? Get a life. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Japandamonium (talk • contribs) 07:28, 15 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I am also confused at the point of converting english to Japanese text on vehicles built by Japanese mfgs. 69.65.224.246 (talk) 23:36, 22 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The subject of Japanese characters is being discussed at Wikipedia talk:WikiProject Automobiles#Japandamonium. Cheers. Stepho-wrs (talk) 08:47, 23 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello South Bay. I see you have added a cn tag to the introduction to this article. As the introduction is no more than a summary of what goes below, and the proposition in the introduction is supported by fully-referenced text in the education section, is the tag really needed? (One of the cites formerly located there has been moved to the education section, and the other already was there, in a fully-formatted version.) Regards, Kablammo (talk) 21:54, 19 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

You are absolutely correct, the tag is not really needed.. South Bay (talk) 03:42, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks. I'll take it off. I'm glad to see you and other editors on this article; many of the original stalwarts are now inactive and my activity level is also down. Best regards, Kablammo (talk) 13:15, 20 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the barnstar. That is very kind. Alanraywiki (talk) 21:16, 25 July 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Your recent edit to the page Las Vegas metropolitan area appears to have added incorrect information and has been reverted or removed. All information in this encyclopedia must be verifiable in a reliable, published source. If you believe the information that you added was correct, please cite the references or sources or before making the changes, discuss them on the article's talk page. Please use the sandbox for any other tests that you wish to make. Do take a look at the welcome page if you would like to learn more about contributing to our encyclopedia. Thank you. ...per the reference found in the article pointing to the US Geological Service ): Figure 1 clearly shows both major urban areas and the smaller towns and cities. For Figure 2, the sensitivity of the satellite sensors was reduced to reveal the intensity of light from the cores of major urban areas; red represents the brightest concentration of lights while yellow is the next brightest. As seen from space, Las Vegas is the brightest city on earth.  _{Guy M | Talk}  11:45, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The archiver on Talk:Global warming is set at five days for a reason, South Bay. There are a lot of discussions, and a lot of them need to be moved out of the way to make room for the active ones. ChyranandChloe (talk) 18:17, 3 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the star! Glad I could help. ;-) AniRaptor2001 (talk) 05:44, 11 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Due to the changes in the minimum wages in some states, only a few (currently 4, then 3 by the start of 2010) are lower than the federal limit. If you go look at the US Dept of Labor website, it would say that if a business is not under federal, then it's under the state's law on it's limit (even if it's less). That works the same way too why some other states even have a higher limit in place. That-Vela-Fella (talk) 12:18, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well thanks for the update, if you want more information see here. South Bay (talk) 12:41, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Mind chipping in on your own conversation? Many people are slightly confused as to a) why you suggested it, b) what the flaw is you're referring to (I don't think "not enough time to vote" has ever been brought up as a problem before) and c) why you think it is a good idea. A statement there would help. Ironholds (talk) 13:13, 16 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, South Bay. You recently posted on my talk page asking me if I had a legitimate reason by "calling everyone non-Hispanic whites" and if that was the "proper term to use". I'll do my best to explain.

In articles, I like editing the "Demographics" section of places such as states and cities. I specifically like editing parts on race and ethnicity. For awhile now, I have been editing the "Demographics" sections of many articles on American cities. I use the website "American FactFinder" to get my sources. There is a difference between race and ethnicity in America. According to the article(Race and ethnicity in the United States Census):[[1]], ethnicity is either Hispanic or Latino or Not Hispanic or Latino. Race, on the other hand, includes White, Black or African American, Asian, and so on. Races like White or Asian can be either Hispanic or Latino or Not Hispanic or Latino. Hispanics are of any race(i.e. White, American Indian and Alaska Native, Asian, and so forth). Examples:(White Hispanic and Latino Americans)[[2]] or (Asian Latin American) [[3]].

When editing the racial composition of a city, I state the percentage of the specific race in that city(i.e. 80.7% White American, which includes both white Hispanic and Latino Americans and non-Hispanic and Latino whites) and then the percentage of non-Hispanic whites alone(i.e. 79.3%). I do the same for other races if needed. That is the reason why I do that. I'm not sure what you mean by "proper term". Perhaps you could explain with a little detail. I hope I explained this well. Contact me through my talk page if you have more questions. Cool Stuff Is Cool (talk) 07:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)Cool Stuff Is CoolCool Stuff Is Cool (talk) 07:28, 24 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Nice to meet you, South Bay... Paride81 (talk) 15:25, 25 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

		The Anti-Spam Barnstar
		Thanks for your hard work in ridding Wikipedia of spam. Your watchful eye and dedication are greatly appreciated! S4n1HS22WMX695In (talk) 02:14, 27 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

In a recent edit you replaced "Americans populations" with "whipopulation".[4] Your edit has been manually reverted as there is no such word that I can find. As for your request for citation, it was already provided earlier, but I will provide a link to that citation as you have requested. --RightCowLeftCoast (talk) 09:52, 29 August 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hi - I noticed your very emphatic adding of T Rowe Price to the list of investment banks. T Rowe Price is a mutual fund company and asset manager not an investment bank. I have now gone through and cleaned up this listing pretty substantially. I moved all of the asset managers to list of investment management firms which seems more appropriate. Tell me if you think I am missing something. |► ϋrбanяeneωaℓ • TALK ◄| 19:58, 14 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Just to let you know that I have reverted this edit [5] because Chicagoland redirects to Chicago metro...area and removing "26th" causes the sentence not to make sense. --Funandtrvl (talk) 01:03, 22 September 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much :) WhisperToMe (talk) 02:50, 7 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

And a thank you from me, though I wonder why I was thought to deserve it. Soidi (talk) 06:41, 15 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Impeach has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. Thank you. Irbisgreif (talk) 23:56, 16 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Template:Impeach, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:Impeach and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:Impeach during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. Irbisgreif (talk) 00:22, 17 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for participating in WP:Requests for adminship/Kww 3
Sometimes, being turned back at the door isn't such a bad thing

—Kww(talk) 19:12, 20 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

South Bay ,Thank you for participating in my RfA, which passed nearly unanimously with 174 in support, 2 in opposition and 1 neutral votes. Special thanks goes to RegentsPark, Samir and John Carter for their kind nomination and support. I am truly honored by the trust and confidence that the community has placed in me. I thank you for your kind inputs and I will be sincerely looking at the reasons that people opposed me so I can improve in those areas ( including my english ;) ). If you ever need anything please feel free to ask me and I would be happy to help you :). Have a great day ! -- Tinu Cherian - 06:02, 28 October 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the cookies! shelleyk 20:53, 7 November 2009 (UTC) —Preceding unsigned comment added by Shelleyk3425 (talk • contribs)

Hi South Bay. I like your enthusiasm but please the next time you change a userbox I made, like you did here, please let me know in advance so that I or someone else won't mistake it for vandalism. Secret Saturdays (talk) 20:43, 15 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank-You so much for the Barn Star, it means a lot. Thanks- House1090 (talk) 05:49, 21 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the barnstar, I really appreciate it! Cheers and happy editing! Apparition^{11 Complaints}/Mistakes

It seems like you like to edit Los Angeles-area articles. Are you interested in the Wikipedia:WikiProject California/Los Angeles task force ? WhisperToMe (talk) 14:05, 24 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I appreciate the offer, but I am not interested at the moment. Thanks! South Bay (talk) 00:16, 25 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Wouldn't it be a better idea to call this list : "List of words ending in -ology" ? If you agree, I can move this article to the new title. JoJan (talk) 14:02, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Yes, this would be more appropriately titled "List of words ending in -ology". Additionally, not only is there no such thing as an "ology", but the list is unsourced, contains no links to other wikipedia articles, contains only shorthand notes on the meanings of specific words (not definitions -- for example, we can all be sure that "phallology" does not mean "the penis"), and would be considered by many to be either or both trivia or a page more appropriate for Wiktionary. In view of all the issues related to this page (which is, furthermore, an uncategorized orphan), it seems to me that it should be moved to user space until such time as it is ready to take its place as either an encyclopedia page or a Wiktionary page. --Orlady (talk) 18:53, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

The tag at the top of the page is there on purpose if you didn't know. thanks! South Bay (talk) 21:43, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Well I do admire your enthusiasm, but an article like this really should be prepped on a subpage of your userpage to get it up to some kind of reasonable shape before it is put up in the encyclopedia. An article has to be able to stand on its own two feet right from the start. After that there is plenty of time for it to be expanded. Best wishes, Invertzoo (talk) 23:08, 29 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

An article that you have been involved in editing, List of words ending in -ology, has been listed for deletion. If you are interested in the deletion discussion, please participate by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/List of words ending in -ology. Thank you.

Please contact me if you're unsure why you received this message. - Wolfkeeper 03:37, 30 November 2009 (UTC)[reply]

I put the reason in the edit summary, "photo at top & map at bottom is the norm; captions were not switched. best to talk about at Talk:Columbia River before making a change like this". First, you switched the photo and map but not the captions, so it had to be fixed one way or the other. Second, the photo and map have both been discussed in some detail on Talk:Columbia River (in one of the archives by now). I don't recall discussion about which should be at the top of the geobox but I'm certain that a number of other major editors of the article would have an opinion, and would probably want the photo at the top. Switching them changes the page's appearance in an immediate and significant way. It would be best to propose the change on Talk:Columbia River and see what others think. Finally, while I'm not aware of a guideline or standard about whether a photo or map should be at the top of a geobox, the norm is for the photo to be at the top, as far as I can tell. Every featured article about rivers is this way, at least--examples: St. Johns River, Balch Creek, Plunketts Creek (Loyalsock Creek), Columbia Slough, Larrys Creek, Tryon Creek, Paulins Kill, etc. Other geographic FA pages that put a photo on top and map below: Mount St. Helens, Mount Pinatubo, Washington, D.C., Warwick Castle, Quneitra, Sheerness, Exmoor, and others. But, like I said, I don't know if there is an established style or guideline for this per se. Even if there is I would recommend bringing it up on the Columbia River talk page first. Pfly (talk) 04:26, 3 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, South Bay! This is just a note thanking you for participating in my recent Request for Adminship, which passed with a total of 93 support !votes, 1 oppose and 3 editors remaining neutral. While frankly overwhelmed by the level of support, I humbly thank the community for the trust it has placed in me, and vow to use the tools judiciously and without malice. KV5 (Talk • Phils)

A summary of the community's comments on our WP:Edit warring policy will be featured in the Policy Report in next Monday's Signpost, and you're invited to participate. Monthly changes to this page are available at WP:Update/1/Conduct policy changes, July 2009 to December 2009, and it may help to look at previous policy surveys at WT:SOCK#Interview for Signpost, WT:CIVILITY#Policy Report for Signpost or WT:U#Signpost Policy Report. There's a little more information at WT:Edit warring#Signpost Policy Report. I'm not watchlisting here, so if you have questions, feel free to ask there or at my talk page. Thanks for your time. (P.S. Your edit to WT:3RR, which was merged into this page, was months ago, but we haven't had much participation in the survey so far this week.) - Dank (push to talk) 03:07, 17 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

While the information you recently added to the Serial killer article is properly cited, it has been discussed on the talk page; it was removed for a reason. I feel that it is best you comment there on why you restored that information. Flyer22 (talk) 14:53, 22 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for the cookies! Shelleyk3425 (talk) 02:18, 27 December 2009 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you for lending your time to help us improve Wikipedia. If you are interested in editing more often than once in a while, we welcome you to log in and participate in our WikiCommunity.

I noticed you have been adding auto-archiving to many pages without first proposing it on those talk pages, one of the things it says on the bot page is to specifically request adding it to any page before just adding it. Auto-archiving is not always appropriate for pages. Anyways just wanted to give you a heads up. -DJSasso (talk) 02:50, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If that's the case then I will not auto-archive anymore. cheers! South Bay (talk) 03:56, 10 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

It is also my performing name as a martial artist.--TonyTheTiger (t/c/bio/WP:CHICAGO/WP:FOUR) 02:05, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Does it send shivers down your opponents spine on a regular basis? South Bay (talk) 02:13, 14 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Thank you very much for your barnstar.Pharaoh of the Wizards (talk) 02:36, 19 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

If you're going to remove the PRODs, please make an effort to add sources. Mass-removing the PRODs would be disruptive. –Juliancolton | ^Talk 20:54, 21 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

.... for a week. You know why - Alison ^❤ 06:58, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please elaborate. South Bay (talk) 22:08, 28 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Certainly. You're involved in this SPI case, as confirmed by two checkusers. That's why the case took so long to process. You've been running dozens of socks across multiple IP addresses & it's all rather damning. I blocked for a week as I'm one of the kinder admins & identified this account as the master account (or, at least, the oldest). Here's just a few of them;

• Eastern East (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Western dige (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Rest west (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Tasting boob (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)
• Peach Beach (talk⁺ · tag · contribs · deleted contribs · logs · filter log · block user · block log · CA · CheckUser(log) · investigate · cuwiki)

... and so on. Not only that, but you also trolled to just get others into trouble. Not good - Alison ^❤ 00:09, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Unbelievable! South Bay (talk) 05:57, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

That's what I said, too! - Alison ^❤ 05:59, 29 January 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Blocked again - for a month this time for the Western Pines (talk · contribs) account. Please stop abusing multiple accounts & quit trolling other editors - Alison ^❤ 08:59, 19 March 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Your account has been blocked indefinitely per your sockpuppetry with this account. If you wish to appeal this block, I would highly advise reading WP:GAB and waiting a few months first. NW (Talk) 22:08, 16 May 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Please don’t SOCC or you’ll get the BLOCC — Preceding unsigned comment added by JohnSmith13345 (talk • contribs) 15:54, 24 March 2019 (UTC)[reply]

Can now be found in Wikipedia:Userboxes/Health#Mood_.28Affective.29_Disorders instead of under the life templates. --I′d※<3※Ɵɲɛ (talk) 04:48, 3 July 2010 (UTC)[reply]

The article Matthews Asia Funds has been proposed for deletion because of the following concern:

Notability appears marginal, at best. An editor likely with the company is trying to remove most of the information that *is* there as "incorrect". Put these together, and I'm not sure we really need or want this article.

While all contributions to Wikipedia are appreciated, content or articles may be deleted for any of several reasons.

You may prevent the proposed deletion by removing the {{proposed deletion/dated}} notice, but please explain why in your edit summary or on the article's talk page.

Please consider improving the article to address the issues raised. Removing {{proposed deletion/dated}} will stop the proposed deletion process, but other deletion processes exist. The speedy deletion process can result in deletion without discussion, and articles for deletion allows discussion to reach consensus for deletion. TexasAndroid (talk) 13:23, 29 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Sandra for Gov has been nominated for deletion. You are invited to comment on the discussion at the template's entry on the Templates for discussion page. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:44, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Template:User Sandra for Gov, a page you substantially contributed to, has been nominated for deletion. Your opinions on the matter are welcome; please participate in the discussion by adding your comments at Wikipedia:Miscellany for deletion/Template:User Sandra for Gov (2nd nomination) and please be sure to sign your comments with four tildes (~~~~). You are free to edit the content of Template:User Sandra for Gov during the discussion but should not remove the miscellany for deletion template from the top of the page; such a removal will not end the deletion discussion. Thank you. — This, that, and the other (talk) 02:47, 8 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on Souper Salad requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section A7 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the article appears to be about an organization or company, but it does not indicate how or why the subject is important or significant: that is, why an article about that subject should be included in an encyclopedia. Under the criteria for speedy deletion, such articles may be deleted at any time. Please see the guidelines for what is generally accepted as notable.

If you think that the page was nominated in error, contest the nomination by clicking on the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion" in the speedy deletion tag. Doing so will take you to the talk page where you can explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. You can also visit the page's talk page directly to give your reasons, but be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag yourself, but do not hesitate to add information that is consistent with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. If the page is deleted, you can contact one of these administrators to request that the administrator userfy the page or email a copy to you. -- Alan Liefting (talk - contribs) 20:05, 10 March 2012 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for your upload to Wikipedia:

• File:Toyota sales.gif

You provided a source, but it is difficult for other users to examine the copyright status of the image because the source is incomplete. Please consider clarifying the exact source so that the copyright status may be checked more easily. It is best to specify the exact Web page where you found the image, rather than only giving the source domain or the URL of the image file itself. Please update the image description with a URL that will be more helpful to other users in determining the copyright status.

If you have uploaded other files, consider checking that you have specified their source in a complete manner. You can find a list of files you have uploaded by following this link. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page or me at my talk page. Thank you. Message delivered by Theo's Little Bot (opt-out) 21:20, 22 April 2013 (UTC)[reply]

A tag has been placed on File:Rain Drops.ogg requesting that it be speedily deleted from Wikipedia. This has been done under section F9 of the criteria for speedy deletion, because the image appears to be a blatant copyright infringement. For legal reasons, we cannot accept copyrighted images or text borrowed from other web sites or printed material, and as a consequence, your addition will most likely be deleted. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously and persistent violators will be blocked from editing.

If you think this page should not be deleted for this reason, you may contest the nomination by visiting the page and clicking the button labelled "Click here to contest this speedy deletion". This will give you the opportunity to explain why you believe the page should not be deleted. However, be aware that once a page is tagged for speedy deletion, it may be removed without delay. Please do not remove the speedy deletion tag from the page yourself, but do not hesitate to add information in line with Wikipedia's policies and guidelines. Seattle (talk) 05:45, 20 December 2014 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article Sport Clips is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Sport Clips until a consensus is reached, and anyone is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article. Tomwsulcer (talk) 18:35, 14 January 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Hello, and welcome to Wikipedia! We welcome and appreciate your contributions, such as Waste Connections, but we regretfully cannot accept copyrighted text or images from either web sites or printed works. This article appears to contain work copied from http://wasteconnections.investorroom.com/2017-10-25-Waste-Connections-Reports-Third-Quarter-2017-Results as well as all other official press releases from the company, and therefore to constitute a violation of Wikipedia's copyright policies. The copyrighted text has been or will soon be deleted. While we appreciate contributions, we must require all contributors to understand and comply with our copyright policy. Wikipedia takes copyright violations very seriously, and persistent violators are liable to be blocked from editing.

If you believe that the article is not a copyright violation, or if you have permission from the copyright holder to release the content freely under license allowed by Wikipedia, then you should do one of the following:

• If you have permission from the author to release the text under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), leave a message explaining the details at Talk:Waste Connections and send an email with confirmation of permission to "permissions-en (at) wikimedia (dot) org". Make sure you quote the exact page name, Waste Connections, in your email. See Wikipedia:Requesting copyright permission for instructions.
• If you hold the copyright to the work: send an e-mail from an address associated with the original publication to permissions-en(at)wikimedia(dot)org or a postal message to the Wikimedia Foundation permitting re-use under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License and GNU Free Documentation License, and note that you have done so on Talk:Waste Connections. See Wikipedia:Donating copyrighted materials for instructions.
• If a note on the original website states that re-use is permitted "under the Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike License (CC-BY-SA), version 3.0", or that the work is released into the public domain, or if you have strong reason to believe it is, leave a note at Talk:Waste Connections with a link to where we can find that note or your explanation of why you believe the content is free for reuse.

It may also be necessary for the text be modified to have an encyclopedic tone and to follow Wikipedia article layout. For more information on Wikipedia's policies, see Wikipedia's policies and guidelines.

If you would like to begin working on a new version of the article you may do so at this temporary page. Leave a note at Talk:Waste Connections saying you have done so and an administrator will move the new article into place once the issue is resolved.

Thank you, and please feel welcome to continue contributing to Wikipedia. Happy editing! Daylen (talk) 05:48, 15 November 2017 (UTC)[reply]

Category:Profession user templates has been nominated for deletion, merging, or renaming. You are encouraged to join the discussion on the Categories for discussion page. —⁠andrybak (talk) 23:18, 19 June 2019 (UTC)[reply]

A discussion is taking place as to whether the article L.A. Insurance is suitable for inclusion in Wikipedia according to Wikipedia's policies and guidelines or whether it should be deleted.

The article will be discussed at Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/L.A. Insurance until a consensus is reached, and anyone, including you, is welcome to contribute to the discussion. The nomination will explain the policies and guidelines which are of concern. The discussion focuses on high-quality evidence and our policies and guidelines.

Users may edit the article during the discussion, including to improve the article to address concerns raised in the discussion. However, do not remove the article-for-deletion notice from the top of the article.

Boleyn (talk) 17:51, 28 August 2021 (UTC)[reply]